Talk:Main Page

Upgrade

Just upgraded it and still having some problems,

• first one of the extensions still doesn't work with the user profiles.
• recent changes gives an sql error
• history on pages gives an sql error

Heavy concerns about the licencing policy

I'd suggest to change the licence under which the content is published. A licence that allows no derivative works is a contradiction in itself when used for a wiki. It actually means, that every entry, once it's created, is not allowed to be changed by anyone except for the author. So every contribution by any user must remain untouched under the licence you've chosen. This means, that using this website as a wiki is illegal, because you are infringing the rights of the other users when you edit their contributions.

What would be the advantage of chosing a nd-licence anyway? To keep the content on your site? To prevent a fork to occur? I think, it merely hinders the creative process and the distribution of information. Why shouldn't one be allowed to compile data from this site into a nice pdf-file? Why shouldn't one be allowed to record example-sentences or make a podcast under a at-nc-licence? There are so many useful ways to use the information of the korean wiki project, why would one want to cross these possibilites out? Futureboy 03:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for voicing your opinion. Matt and I have talked about exactly how to deal with the copyright of this site. When I first started this site I simply chose the current license, but it doesn't mean this is the permanent license. Some concerns I have are about websites that charge people to learn Korean using our free content and making people pay. I also don't want someone in the future putting our explanations and articles into a book and making money off of us. Another thing is I just don't want people ripping off our work and not crediting us. I admit I'm new to this so I don't know much about the copyright issues, so perhaps you could suggest a better license to meet the criteria I've mentioned. --Bluesoju 03:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your immediate reply. I seems, that you don't want people to make money with the contributions of volunteers and that you want them to be credited. That's exactly what the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Licence is made for, which should be extended with the Share Alike option, so that all derivative works are under the same licence. If somebody is using content under such a licence for commercial purposes or uses it without mentioning the authorship, you can file a lawsuit agaist this person. The licence I would recommend for this project is http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

The problem with changing the licence later on is, that you have to ask all the authors for their agreement. They contributed to this site under a certain licence, and they are the only ones who can relicence the work. You as the administrator of this site can't do it, because you don't own the content. So it's advisable to make a licence change while the project is still small.Futureboy 06:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice, I'll look into changing it as soon as possible (gotta find out how first). Since the project is still small, please let us know if you have any other suggestions. If your interested in being a sysop as well, let me know. Thanks for your help and hope to see further contributions and suggestions from you. --Bluesoju 06:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)